The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal may be filed on the ground that the amount of punishment is extremely unreasonable only for a case on which death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not legitimate

2.(a)

The purpose of necessary confiscation or collection under Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act is to deprive a criminal or a third party of money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits, and to prevent him from holding unlawful profits. Thus, in case where part of the money and valuables received under the pretext of solicitation or arrangement in connection with a case or affairs handled by a public official is given as a bribe to a relevant public official in connection with solicitation in accordance with the purport of actually receiving money and valuables, or where it is given to another intermediary in accordance with the purport of actually receiving money and valuables, the benefit of the part does not actually belong to the defendant, and only the money

(See Supreme Court Decision 93Do1569 delivered on December 28, 1993). B.

According to the records, the Defendant stated that, from the time when he was investigated by the investigative agency on October 7, 2013, the Defendant provided KRW 5 million out of KRW 20,000,000,000, which was parked in the Geumcheon Police Station as a solicitation, to the police officers. In addition, the Defendant paid or delivered meal expenses of KRW 1,40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

Therefore, the court below is related to the defendant's money and valuables received.